From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 44771 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2015 12:45:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 44756 invoked by uid 89); 21 Oct 2015 12:45:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-yk0-f179.google.com Received: from mail-yk0-f179.google.com (HELO mail-yk0-f179.google.com) (209.85.160.179) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:45:14 +0000 Received: by yknn9 with SMTP id n9so47335376ykn.0 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.129.76.193 with SMTP id z184mr5436905ywa.263.1445431512516; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.117.136 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 05:45:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <56269E01.5010408@linaro.org> References: <55ECFC2A.7050908@linaro.org> <56269E01.5010408@linaro.org> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [0/7] Type promotion pass and elimination of zext/sext From: Richard Biener To: Kugan Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-10/txt/msg02068.txt.bz2 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Kugan wrote: > > > On 07/09/15 12:53, Kugan wrote: >> >> This a new version of the patch posted in >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00226.html. I have done >> more testing and spitted the patch to make it more easier to review. >> There are still couple of issues to be addressed and I am working on them. >> >> 1. AARCH64 bootstrap now fails with the commit >> 94f92c36a83d66a893c3bc6f00a038ba3dbe2a6f. simplify-rtx.c is mis-compiled >> in stage2 and fwprop.c is failing. It looks to me that there is a latent >> issue which gets exposed my patch. I can also reproduce this in x86_64 >> if I use the same PROMOTE_MODE which is used in aarch64 port. For the >> time being, I am using patch >> 0006-temporary-workaround-for-bootstrap-failure-due-to-co.patch as a >> workaround. This meeds to be fixed before the patches are ready to be >> committed. >> >> 2. vector-compare-1.c from c-c++-common/torture fails to assemble with >> -O3 -g Error: unaligned opcodes detected in executable segment. It works >> fine if I remove the -g. I am looking into it and needs to be fixed as well. > > Hi Richard, > > Now that stage 1 is going to close, I would like to get these patches > accepted for stage1. I will try my best to address your review comments > ASAP. Ok, can you make the whole patch series available so I can poke at the implementation a bit? Please state the revision it was rebased on (or point me to a git/svn branch the work resides on). > * Issue 1 above (AARCH64 bootstrap now fails with the commit) is no > longer present as it is fixed in trunk. Patch-6 is no longer needed. > > * Issue 2 is also reported as known issue > > * Promotion of PARM_DECLs and RESULT_DECLs in IPA pass and patterns in > match.pd for SEXT_EXPR, I would like to propose them as a follow up > patch once this is accepted. I thought more about this and don't think it can be made work without a lot of hassle. Instead to get rid of the remaining "badly" typed registers in the function we can key different type requirements on a pass property (PROP_promoted_regs), thus simply change the expectation of the types of function parameters / results according to their promotion. The promotion pass would set PROP_promoted_regs then. I will look over the patch(es) this week but as said I'd like to play with some code examples myself and thus like to have the current patchset in a more easily accessible form (and sure to apply to some rev.). Thanks, Richard. > * I am happy to turn this pass off by default till IPA and match.pd > changes are accepted. I can do regular testing to make sure that this > pass works properly till we enable it by default. > > > Please let me know what you think, > > Thanks, > Kugan